America First Puts Syria Last

The US withdrawal from Syria amounts to a premature declaration of victory – and thus fits a familiar pattern for many of America’s engagements in the world. But this departure is more notable – and may be more damaging – than most, because it is being ordered by a president who clearly has no idea what he is doing.

DENVER – No Middle East conflict is as complex as the one raging in Syria. The fight involves a government that is antithetical to Western values and a Sunni extremist insurgency that at one point captured the borderlands between Syria and Iraq and fought all the way to the gates of Baghdad. The stakes of the war are so high that a varied cast of foreign actors – including Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Hezbollah – have all been drawn in.

But there are actually numerous wars being fought in Syria. One struggle, waged against the Islamic State (ISIS), is well known to the American public. Less understood is the war to succeed the House of Assad, which has ruled the country as a secular dynasty for almost 50 years. A third conflict involves northern Syria’s Kurds, who joined with the United States to fight ISIS but whose efforts have stoked fear among Turkish leaders that the aspirations of Syria’s Kurdish population could embolden the Kurds in Turkey.

Now add to this many-sided conflict a US president who is uncomfortable with nuance or detail. Donald Trump neither possesses an internationalist mindset nor grasps the message that American power conveys. But while Trump could have been forgiven for arguing that America’s only interest in Syria was the defeat of ISIS, his recent decision to withdraw all US forces – which he justified with an erroneous declaration of victory – is inexcusable.

Trump’s decision will embolden President Bashar al-Assad, whose rule has been catastrophic for Syria. Assad has consistently shown an inability to navigate the complexities of the crisis, including the rapid urbanization, and subsequent radicalization, of rural Sunnis displaced by climate change; the incubation of radicalized Sunnis in neighboring Iraq amid the consolidation of Shia political power in Baghdad; and the growth of Kurdish nationalist sentiment in the region.

But Assad did know whom to call to maintain his grip on power, and the infusion of Russian, Iranian, and regional Shia groups was enough to turn the tide in his favor. That has given his regime a new lease on life in a region not accustomed to giving leaders second chances. And yet, Assad, like the French Bourbons, seems to have learned nothing and forgotten nothing during his 18 years in power, and is unlikely to consolidate his victory by introducing the federalized, decentralized structures needed to govern Syria effectively.

US policy in Syria, the policy that Trump campaigned against and has now officially abandoned, has long rested on two pillars: stability in Iraq and the defeat of ISIS. Under President Barack Obama, and then briefly under Trump, US forces worked with local fighters to bring ISIS to heel. But, contrary to Trump’s claims, ISIS is neither defeated nor dead; absent viable institutions and stable political arrangements in Syria, the group is likely to return in some form.

Subscribe now

For a limited time only, get unlimited access to
On Point, The Big Picture, and the PS Archive, plus our annual magazine,
for just $75.

SUBSCRIBE

Rather than acting unilaterally, as he apparently did, Trump should have been asking his foreign-policy team for clarification on a number of thorny questions. What endgame should the US be seeking in Syria? Given Assad’s support from Russia, Iran, and Turkey (whose interests in Syria are hardly trivial), how likely is his departure? What political solutions are possible? Is an election feasible or desirable in a context devoid of functioning institutions?

But the withdrawal from Syria is more notable – and may be more damaging – than most, because it is being ordered by a US president who clearly has no idea what he is doing, and who is incapable of gauging his actions against the lessons of history. Facts are not knowledge, and knowledge is not wisdom, but in Trump’s worldview, there is simply no room for the idea that history can both inform and repeat, or for the connections among many of the world’s most pressing security challenges, whether Syria, Russia, or Iran.

Typically, US foreign policy is viewed as a proxy not only for the president’s toughness, but also for his responsibility to use all resources at his disposal to grapple with matters of state and national security that the public may not see. But with Trump, there is none of that. The bluster and blunders that have become visible to all are as thoughtful and strategic as it gets.

Christopher R. Hill, former US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia, was US Ambassador to Iraq, South Korea, Macedonia, and Poland, a US special envoy for Kosovo, a negotiator of the Dayton Peace Accords, and the chief US negotiator with North Korea from 2005-2009. He is Chief Adviser to the Chancellor for Global Engagement and Professor of the Practice in Diplomacy at the University of Denver, and the author of Outpost.

If US has the right of self defense, well, every country also has the right of self defense (including preemptive actions).If US has sovereignty, well, every country also has sovereignty.

US illegal attacks/invasions (Iraq, Libya, etc. which are war crimes) not only lead to millions being raped / murdered / injured / traumatized / enslaved and/or displaced, these illegal attacks/invasions are provoking/radicalizing more people and creating more and more jihadists and terrorists.

Among others, see the ordinary Libyans continue to suffer the tragic consequences of illegal attacks by UK, France (helped by US with Obama leading from behind), the endless violence and bloodshed, the ever increasing number of desperate refugees fleeing/taking the treacherous journeys to escape (with many being enslaved, drowned, killed, traumatized along the way).

Syria is largely a secular country ensuring the protection of minorities (like Christians).

Many Syrian Christians support the government in the war as the Alawite, a member of a Shi'ite-derived minority sect, as a protector against jihadists.

The West should either stay out of it or support Assad.

The quickest way to end the war is for Assad to win.

In fact, Assad must stay to defend (& win) his secular country ensuring the protection of all minorities.

But U.S./UK/France still continue to support/arm the jihadist rebels to commit more and more war crimes in Syria.

On several issues it is difficult to agree with Mr Hill.a)He does not say that of view corresponds to the US approach to the conflict.b)He calls the Assad Government "a government that is antithetical to Western values", however, after the Yemen war, the Kashoggi assassination, the embracement of the Egipt government...it is difficult to see why the "western values" can be in conflict with the Assad government.c)Hill does give almost no credit to the ability of Mr Assad to understand and maneuver in the Syrian crisis. The fact is that Assad has won and it would be no surprise if he has become truly popular in Syria. d)It is in the interest of Syria, Iran and Russia to defeat ISIS. As a matter of fact they, without US help (some think that it happened against the US), were able to downsize ISIS in about a year. Why is it necessary the US to defeat ISIS when it spent more thant 3 years without being able to reduce ISIS size?e)It is not that the US falls into a "premature belief that the objective has been achieved". It is that the US has also other objectives which cannot be attained if the US are dragged into another war in the Middle East or nearby be it Syria or Iran.f)The only correct aspect I find in Mr Hill's article is related to the inability of Mr Trump (greater than Assad's) to understand the complexities not only of the situation in the Middle East but of any situation. However, it is good to realize, everytime a situation like this is factually presented, that no US President acts alone or without the advise of knowledgeable teams.

The Russians are for Assad and against IS, The Kurds are against IS and the Turks, and for the Yazidis who are hated by IS and the Turks who like the Russians (on tuesdays only) The Christians are for Assad and against the IS and the Kurds, and the IS is against the Kurds, the Americans, the Russians, the Yazidis, the Israelis and the French. The Iranians are for the Iranians, and the rest is negotiable, and everyone hates the Israelis (except some of the Kurds, some of the time).... The Hez fight for the Iranians, against the Assads, and the Russians, and the Israelis. They seems indifferent to the Turks, and the IS.

A movement was growing to kick out the US imperialists from Syria some years ago which involved Turkey, who clearly has understood that it too, was on the hit list for Uncle Scam and Zionists.

The US tried regime change in Turkey back in the summer of 2016, as well as shooting down the Russian Su-24 jet, on the eve of Turkish Stream (like that wasn't a big give-away, fools), both of which spectacularly backfired and pushed Turkey away from NATO.

Add to that the attempted crashing of the Lira by Wall Street, the stoopid sanctimonious charging of Turkish banks in the Iran sanctions nonsense, and to top it all off, NATO support of Kurdish separatists. As a result, Erdogan realized that NATO is not really an ally. What did you expect?

Turkey pushes back against US. US is cornered in Syria and that such US imperialism ends up uniting Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Russia and Lebanon together to kick out the snakes from the region and defeat their henchmen, including ISIS and other varieties of head-choppers.

Uncle Scam is in a complete clusterfuck in the Middle East.NATO needs Turkey much more than Turkey needs NATO.

Turkey is also a terrorist supporter, supporting Al Qaeda, Faylaq al Sham, FSA and other idiot brigades. However, we must first deal with Uncle Scam, who is a much more insidious threat to the region, before negotiating with Turkey.

Turkey can be negotiated with; Uncle Sham can't - It simply is not "agreement-capable", therefore needs to understand force.

Mr Watson Brown,What is getting on your nerves? All the ugly truths that you are confronting now?

US leaders and their generals must be held accountable for all the illegal attacks/invasions (which are war crimes).

Given the millions of innocent people (including children, women) being raped / murdered / injured / traumatized/enslaved and/or displaced as a result of all these illegal attacks/invasions, these leaders and their generals are the biggest war criminals in modern history, they must face the music, they must be charged/jailed to uphold the rule of law.

Justice delayed is justice denied.Justice must be served and must be seen to be served.

Take a long hard look at yourself, all these ugly truths are not fake news and you know it.

Kurds are fools if they think selling out to US is a good idea for their long term interests.

The Kurds in Iraq made the big mistake and are now working with Baghdad.The Kurds in Syria are wise to follow the same - work with Damascus, and not listen to divisive Americans and their insidious agenda.

If they want to be surrounded by even more hostile states, keep hoping for the US clusterfuck. They always screw you over, if history is anything to go by.

Working with the Syrian government is the best thing for their long term interests.

US/NATO's presence and actions in Syria are illegal (which are war crimes), US/NATO must get out of Syria totally before somethings stupid/tragic happen which US/NATO will be held fully accountable.

US has repeatedly lied and violated UN to attack/invade (Iraq, Libya, etc) illegally with the scale of crimes against humanity and human-rights abuses are unimaginable, millions being killed/raped/injured/traumatized/enslaved and/or displaced, captive women being sold as concubines, hundreds of thousands of refugees flooding Europe, more than 8500 people have died or disappeared while attempting to cross the Mediterranean since the death of Alan Kurdi, the three-year-old Syrian boy whose body washed ashore in Turkey in 2015, drawing global attention to deadly consequences of the illegal attacks/invasions, the most brutal crimes against humanity committed by US/UK/France, spending trillions of dollars of hard earned taxpayer money on these illegal attacks/invasions....all of these are the results of US/UK/France illegal attacks/invasions (Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc).

Are these leaders of US/UK/France and their generals above the law?

Where is your moral compass? Where is your moral obligation?

Are all these illegal attacks the principles and instincts deeply rooted in the American spirit?

Is this how America stands by their principles and values, national prestige, international legitimacy?

The mainstream media provoke and egg on these leaders Bush/Blair/Sarkozy/Cameron/Obama, etc. (and their generals) to lie, to cheat, to break laws, to attack/invade illegally (Iraq, Libya, etc), they all have a lot of blood on their hands.

These illegal attacks/invasions require global response and actions to charge/jail these leaders & their generals responsible for these illegal attacks/invasions.

The refugee crisis -an endless humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Europe and elsewhere - is the direct result of the US/UK/France illegal invasions/attacks/meddling (Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc).

Now US, UK, France are evading their responsibility to avoid accepting these desperate refugees...

The U.S., UK, France must accept at least a million refugees in each of these 3 countries since they have created all these refugees in the first place.

Since 2001, U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Pakistan have cost American taxpayers $5.9 trillion, more than 480,000 people have died from the wars and more than 244,000 civilians have been killed as a result of fighting. Additionally, another 10 million people have been displaced due to violence, the worst cruelties inflicted on people.

These trillions of dollars could be much much better spent on fixing US crumbling infrastructure, education, healthcare, etc to benefit all Americans...

US leaders: Who do you think you are? How many more lies do you want to tell to commit more war crimes?

We must not allow these leaders (Bush/Blair/Sarkozy/Cameron/Obama, etc and their generals) to destroy the rule of law.

When you are unfortunate to have to deal with US/UK/France, these leaders will utterly trample/crush the principles of rule of law and democracy, anyone/any countries who refuse to kiss US dirty feet will be US leaders' targets of assassinations, illegal attacks/invasions, never mind all the war crimes/ atrocities committed by these US leaders (& their generals) with millions being raped / murdered / injured / traumatized / enslaved and/or displaced (that are much much worse than anyone meddling in US elections) which we all have seen in Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc, which make these leaders (Bush/Blair/Sarkozy/Cameron/Obama, etc and their generals) even more atrocious than terrorists.

These leaders (Bush/Blair/Sarkozy/Cameron/Obama, etc and their generals) are man enough to break laws to commit war crimes with devastating atrocities yet they are not man enough to own up their responsibility to face the music, shirking their responsibility, what lowlife leaders they are.

The way US deals with other countries is undemocratic to say the least.

To seek global dominance, US is using its heft and military might to tyrannize anyone who refuse to kiss US filthy feet (breaking laws to attack/invade such countries illegally, committing war crimes, sanctions, CIA assassinations, helping/funding to agitate/escalate bloody violence to achieve regime changes...you name it, they do it and commit atrocities and crimes against humanity).

All the above are not fake news. . The mainstream media, why are you self-censoring all these undeniable, indisputable, and in-your-face ugly truths?

The poisonous hypocrisy is too toxic.

Until all this poisonous hypocrisy is stopped, these ugly truths must be told and retold.

Until all this poisonous hypocrisy is stopped, the world continues to face endless conflicts and bloodshed.

The value of US withdrawal from Syria may well depend on what actions the US anticipates against Iran in 2019.

If Iran decides to interfere with Gulf shipping in response to US economic sanctions, for example, the US might choose to respond with harsh military counter-measures, such as destroying Iran's oil refining capability or electricity generation infrastructure. In that event, not having 2,000 US personnel in Syria at risk of attack by Iranian proxies will have seemed as a very shrewd move by President Trump.

The United States has fought in Syria without sanction under US law and without authority from the UN Security Council. Donald Trump made a campaign promise to withdraw from Syria, and he won the election. You can argue that withdrawal is unwise. What you can't credibly do is argue that staying is legal or has democratic approval.

You would think that Mr Haas wrote this piece to say something sensible about the Middle East. And perhaps he is trying to, but he can't help himself but to devote a paragraph to the favorite religious incantation of "educated elites": climate change.

People of the Middle East are not being displaced by the climate change which can be cured by carbon taxes in Europe or the US. They are being displaced by the explosive population growth in that region, which is caused by a collision between their dominant religious culture and a rapid decline in the mortality of the young which was gifted to them by the western medicine. Here is a link to an instructive, simple graph: https://www.prb.org/populationtrendsandchallengesinthemiddleeastandnorthafrica/

Present unpleasantness may have been directly triggered by a periodic drought combined with a spike in worldwide food prices, a spike that was primarily caused by financial speculation in the US prior to 2008. But the direct, underlying cause which will not go away on its own is that the population growth in this region is overwhelming the capacity of these countries to cope. Think physical barriers, not just political barriers.

You cannot think of solutions if you have all the causes backwards. The tragedy of the present era is the mental deterioration of western elites which appear incapable of thinking straight about cause and effect.

In so far as the future in Syria goes, my personal guess (no more than a wild guess) is that Putin will live to rue the day he landed those troops in Syria. He is now neck deep in an intractable mess that is that whole region. On the other hand, if the mess deepens to a point of seriously disrupting world oil flows, we will have a war ,as the sobriety in the West rapidly returns, possibly in a form of autocratic regimes trying to cope with an economic fallout. Then, things will get really interesting.

The author is very much wrong in his assessment of the US withdrawal from Syria. Syria is not Iraq, Iraq after the US invasion was left without anything to speak of, no public representatives, no government or public institutions, no army, etc. Whilst Syria, the regime for one reason or the other has managed to survive and to keep its public services and representatives and its army ...to some extent... intact. Some Arab countries that had boycotted the Syrian regime are now returning in force to Syria and promising financial and other support (they will do anything just to keep Erdoghan away....better the devil you know....than the devil you don't). Mind due, the Syrian war was started by the Obama Administration, history has been written, so no need to look back on it in this instance. As far as any vacuum that the US forces on the ground can leave behind, no worries there at all, there are still US forces in Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi, etc.....and of course there is always the most reliable and very expensive ally.....Israel....to do the dirty work!

Christopher R. Hill gets it wrong. There is no such thing as “America First” on Trump’s mind. In fact his presidency is all about „Trump First“ and „America Last“, as he puts personal interests before his country’s. In foreign policy, he has brought America to total irrelevance. Gone are the days when the US used to call the shots. Trump’s sudden withdrawal of US troops from Syria would have sparked less outrage, had he not naively claimed that ISIS were defeated. The author criticises Trump of making the same mistakes as his predecessors. Trump’s “premature” declaration of victory reminds of George W. Bush in May 2003, standing on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln off the California coast. A banner behind him read “Mission Accomplished”. Trump also repeats Obama’s mistakes in 2011, who withdrew from Iraq, after failing to secure legal immunity for about 5,000 U.S. troops there. Critics accused Obama of laying the groundwork for the rise of ISIS. Trump’s unilateral action took all but a small number of officials by surprise, and they had failed to dissuade him. Key members of Congress had not been informed, much less consulted before he made the announcement. Nor had America’s allies – the Kurds – some of whose troops have been dependent on US presence for security. A US president is not supposed to make major foreign policy decisions without consulting allies beforehand. It is part of good manners. Besides interactions allow both sides to learn something through consulting and informing.As expected, Trump’s announcement was widely condemned. The withdrawal, to begin immediately, will take a toll on the Kurds, whom the US had been protecting from Turkey, which sees them as a bigger threat than ISIS. As formidable fighters, the Kurds have been America’s reliable ally in the region in fighting Islamist extremists. The withdrawal leaves the civilians in Syria to the mercies of Bashar al-Assad, and his Russian and Iranian backers.The only foreign leaders who welcomed Trump’s decision were Turkey’s authoritarian leader, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Russia’s revisionist president, Vladimir Putin. It later emerged that Erdogan was explaining Trump all the problems with the US presence in Iraq and Syria. Impatient and irritated, Trump told Erdogan: “OK, it’s all yours. We are done,” according to a detailed readout of the phone call between both presidents. Trump’s announcement was too much for defence secretary James Mattis, the most respected member of Trump’s cabinet, to stomach. Although it was far from the only fallout, he resigned. Mattis was widely seen as the only hope for reining in Trump’s most dangerous impulses, and he made clear that he objected not just to the Syrian blunder, but to a pattern of behaviour: Trump’s nefarious games with allies and opponents; his willingness to abandon friends, such as the Kurds; and his trashing of alliances, such as NATO. The author says Trump should have consulted Mattis and Mike Pompeo to sort out “a number of thorny questions. What endgame should the US be seeking in Syria? Given Assad’s support from Russia, Iran, and Turkey (whose interests in Syria are hardly trivial), how likely is his departure? What political solutions are possible? Is an election feasible or desirable in a context devoid of functioning institutions?”It comes as no surprise that Trump “has no idea what he is doing,” because he is unfit for the office. Lacking skills and acumen, he is “incapable of gauging his actions against the lessons of history. Facts are not knowledge, and knowledge is not wisdom, but in Trump’s worldview, there is simply no room for the idea that history can both inform and repeat, or for the connections among many of the world’s most pressing security challenges, whether Syria, Russia, or Iran.”Apart from being corrupt, greedy and mendacious, Trump is impetuous, incurious, incompetent, injudicious, unintelligent and uninformed. Most of all he has no regard for expert opinion and the rule of law. As unreliable as he is, there is one thing predictable about him – his erratic behaviour and propensity of making decisions that come as bolts from the blue in rapid succession. No wonder many fear that his presidency is spiralling out of control and hoping for a way to have him removed.

Why blame Trump for a decision made by Obama? With hindsight, he was right to see Syria was 'unwinnable' and that prolonging its agony was in no one's interests- except the Israelis. Why keep a presence in the area so as to demonstrate for all future time the utter fatuity of American foreign policy in the region?It does not matter if ISIS or Al Qaeeda or whatever dies or is resurrected. It is sufficient that they concentrate on the 'near jihad' and give up the 'far jihad' as a fantasy for adolescents.

New Comment

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.